Andy,
I agree the location does not matter. It could be in a classroom, office or a 
box with green eggs and ham. To me the issue is personal vs. public. Giving my 
age away, way back when it was simple. The personal or consumer home video 
license was for viewing in your dwelling by yourself and your invitees. That is 
the only place you could technically play back video. Now you can watch video 
anywhere so the personal use description has to be expanded to say for example 
an airport lounge. But that doesn't mean everyone in the lounge can watch it, 
only those personal to you. 

Clearly a personal rights license intends to restrict usage as you say. But the 
simple act of limiting usage does not make it personal. With your logic a 
professor could invite the whole campus to view a program. The general public 
would be excluded. But how is that personal? I believe Swank lawyers would come 
knocking if you tried that with their movies. You still have to look at the 
nature of the viewers and I maintain students are not personal as noted before. 

Regards,
Bob

On Oct 17, 2016, at 8:56 AM, videolib-requ...@lists.berkeley.edu wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Andrew Horbal <ahor...@umd.edu>
> Date: October 17, 2016 8:56:33 AM CDT
> To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [Videolib] Amazon Prime
> Reply-To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> 
> 
> I think it's relevant that the license states that it's okay to screen the 
> film in a location such as a "hotel room, dorm room, office, or airport 
> waiting lounge" provided that the screening "is limited to a private viewing 
> for you and your invitees" (note that the license says "invitees," not 
> "friends'). It seems probable to me that the intent is simply to restrict the 
> number of people who are able to see the film to the licensee and people 
> chosen to see it by the licensee (as opposed to the general "public"), and 
> that if this condition is met, the location of the screening isn't important.
> 
> I don't think there's any question that according to this license, the 
> professor could invite a group of students to their office to watch the film. 
> Continuing along this path, I submit the following:
> 
> 1. There's no functional difference between the professor inviting the 
> students to their office to watch the film and inviting them to their regular 
> classroom, provided only the invited students are able to see the film (i.e. 
> the door is closed, and people who aren't in the class aren't admitted).
> 2. There's no logical reason why the screening described in (1) couldn't take 
> place during the class's regularly-schedule meeting time.
> 3. Assuming the screenings described above in (1) and (2) are allowable, it 
> would be silly to require the professor to jump through the hoop of actually 
> issuing "invitations" to their students, provided, again, that just the 
> students in the class are able to see the film.
> 
> In all of these cases, the same number of people see the film is identical. 
> This is why it seems to me that a classroom screening is more similar to a 
> "private viewing for you and your invitees" than a "public presentation." 
> 
> Andy
> 
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Bob Norris <b...@filmideas.com> wrote:
> Well, using the I'm not a lawyer just thinking logically approach, a 
> professor and the students seems more similar to a public performance than a 
> private viewing. Profs may have an affinity for their students but the 
> students are not the prof's friends. It is rare that a prof would invite 
> students into their home or hotel room, hopefully. However, when you have a 
> public performance it is often people with something in common that have an 
> affinity for one another but are not friends. It is not "Personal," which is 
> the only right Amazon is granting. 
> 
> My 2 cents,
> Bob
> 

VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues 
relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, 
preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and 
related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective 
working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication 
between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and 
distributors.

Reply via email to